Starting with Large Format [Archive] - Large Format Photography Forum

View Full Version : Starting with Large Format

strohscw

30-Dec-2011, 01:41

Hi alltogether,
having many years experience with 24x36 (Canon DSLR) and 6x7 (Mamiy 7) I would like to enter Large Format to take the next, final, step on my long way in landscape and architecture photography.
Now I am looking for the right equipment and thought to get some advices in the right forum.
I own a Durst 1200 enlarger so I would like to stay with 4x5" as max format.
I read a lot in internet and with my requests for the camera (transportable, shift) I ended up with the Cambo wide as a possibility. Thought about the 580 with the possibility to have 4x5" negatives and with a 6x12 rolfilm back the possibility to use 120 film for big panoramas which can be processed in my darkroom.

So, you see there are my confuse thoughts, no LF camera at the moment.

What would you suggest in this case?
I would like to find a used analog equipment which is not too heavy, not to expensive but still a step up form my Mamiya 7.

thanks in advance!

john biskupski

30-Dec-2011, 02:55

Welcome to the world of LF! Just some words of advice. There's about a thread a week with the same question, which LF camera to start with, so do your research here and sift through to refine your quest. Secondly, just my thought, but is there really a 'final' step in photography, as our choices are likely to evolve as you evolve as a photographer. Also, a lot of photographers run with parallel systems, LF, digital and MF, either because they like to or they provide tools for different purposes. Lastly, be aware, you may find it hard to beat the resolution of the Mamiya 7 lenses with just 4x5 in most landscape situations where you don't use movements.

So, in terms of specific advice, for your purposes, you may want to look more at monorail or field cameras with good movements and bellows length rather than press cameras like the Crown Graphics. Search the threads and you'll find lots of good recommendations. I followed the same path as you, through 35mm film and digital, Mamiya 7, and then my first LF camera was the little metal Horseman 45FA, as I prioritised light weight and small tripod for trips. Later I realised that it was really quite limited for a number of reasons (limited bellows length, cumbersome rear movements, limited choice of lenses). Also tried the little Wista DX with better movements. But I got over my dislike of heavier weight cameras and tripods, and moved to larger formats. Quite a few cameras are built with 5x7 sized rear standards, or with monorails you can swap the standards, and with a 4x5 reducing back you have lots of choice with both format and lenses. Same thing with 8x10 plus a 4x5 reducing back, if you ever get tempted to try the larger format.

Jim Jones

30-Dec-2011, 05:34

Used entry level LF cameras are inexpensive. Don't worry too much about your first one. With experience, you will know better than any of us what your second one should be. A camera bought at the right price might be sold at no loss to finance a more suitable one. I tend to keep equipment, even though it largely duplicates newer gear in function. My monorail, field, and press cameras accumulated over many years each have their advantages.

It's easier to find information on lenses that applies to your own needs. Since lenses can be exchanged between most LF cameras, first buy one quality lens of moderate focal length. After using it, you'll know what other lenses you might add. Ideally, they will be mounted on boards that fit all the cameras you may eventually own.

Drew Bedo

30-Dec-2011, 06:16

John and Jim give good advice. Many of us started with some model of yhe Graphic press cameras. The important thing is to get into it and shoot some.

strohscw

30-Dec-2011, 10:37

Thanks for your tips.
I am also on the way to find a light 4x5" camera with some shifting possibilities like I have with my Canon TSE lenses.
According focal length I allway prefered wide angle lenses for landscape and architecture.
I thought to start with the 58mm XL it seems to be quite closet to my 17mm in 24x36 and the 43mm in 6x7 which I really like.
The thing I am not sure is the body itself.
Greetings from Austria.

John Kasaian

30-Dec-2011, 10:42

A monorail would be a good one ot start with---near unlimited shift if that is what you're after. Calumet 400s are very inexpensive. Add a lens with acres of coverage and you should have something to keep your interest for some time.

Frank Petronio

30-Dec-2011, 11:03

Many professional architectural photographers used 4x5 Sinar F2 cameras with bag bellows. A solid tripod with a Sinar Pan-Tilt head is very helpful. The Sinar is widely available, inexpensive on the used market, well-made, and versatile because it is systematic in that you can "build" it from components to suit each situation. In the basic F2 configuration it is fairly compact and light, although not as much as a good field camera. However it offers unlimited, and very secure and precise movements, unlike the more compact field cameras. Every choice involves a compromise.

Other high quality monorails with full movements and bag bellows are available, such as the Linhof Kardans, the Arca-Swiss F-line, the Toyo G, and Cambos.... each with their pluses and minuses.

The most popular lenses for architecture have usually been the faster, modern 90mms such as the Rodenstock 90/4.5 Grandagon or the Schneider 90/5.6 Super-Angulon (or the later XL series). Many photographers think they will use super-wide angles for architecture and while they are occasionally required by naive clients or special circumstances, you will do most of your shots with 90s or longer so I would spend the most on this key lens. A 58XL on 4x5 is very wide and personally I think they homogenize everything into looking generic.

I typically advocate starting with a Graflex Crown Graphic as they are very simple and inexpensive but if you want to do architecture, a good monorail is really the way to go. You may still want a Crown or a nice field camera too as a second or an introductory experiment.

rdenney

30-Dec-2011, 11:30

+1 to Frank's post. The cheapest entry to a camera good for architecture and which has all the wonders of system interchangeability is the Cambo SC, particularly when it is labeled Calumet 45N or 45NX. Linhof Kardans are also quite inexpensive, but not as system-oriented. The newer and more interchangeable Technikardans are much more expensive, and deservedly so. Arca-Swiss has devoted followers but those also tend to be more pricey--even the budget Discovery model.

For me, the sweet spot between price, system interchangeability, and quality is the Sinar F series. I prefer the F2, particularly for the front standard, but an older F in good condition is still a good choice. These were owned by pro studios in quantity, and are plentiful on the used market. That drives down the price. And there at any given time about six pages of Sinar stuff on ebay, making it easy to build a decent starter kit without having to wait months for the right deal to come along.

I would start with something offered on this forum, or for sale at KEH or Midwest Photo. Then, if you want some accessories or other goodies, ebay can be a source after you really know what you need.

Any of these choices will have an International (aka Graflok) back that will accommodate all the various 6x12 and other format roll-film holders. If you end up using a lot of roll-film in the view camera in order to benefit from movements, and if you want wide-angle lenses for those roll-film formats, then make sure your camera can conveniently handle those short lenses. I switched from my Cambo/Calumet to Sinar so that I could conveniently work with 47mm and 65mm lenses for 6x9 and 6x12 formats. I use the 65 with 4x5, but I agree with Frank that the standard wide for 4x5 architectural work is the 90, which all these cameras can handle easily.

Given what you already probably own, you should be able to build a decent kit with a Sinar and a couple of lenses, including a good 90, for no more than a grand or so. After what you spend for your Mamiya 7 stuff (or considering what you might spend for a Cambo Wide with all the same lenses), this should be a relief.

Rick "with similar requirements" Denney

Alan Gales

30-Dec-2011, 11:41

For some reason monorails tend to "sit" on this forum. If you are patient you can get a really clean one for a very good price on here.

E. von Hoegh

30-Dec-2011, 12:04

+1 on the monorails.
Theres a short-rail Cambo, with special bellows especially for WA lenses. They show up here, there might be one in the FS section.

Frank Bunnik

30-Dec-2011, 12:35

I use a Cambo Wide with 65, 90 and 120mm lenses. You can see examples in the landscape section on my website www.frankbunnik.zenfolio.com and there is a good review of and panoramic shots made with this camera here: http://www.paul-armitage.com/CamboWide.html

I like this camera a lot but it has it's limitations. The longest lens you can use is a 150mm lens and these have to have the dedicated Cambo Wide "lens mount", no tilt, no back movements. If you can live with this, it is an ideal camera that is hard to damage.

All the best, Frank

banjo

30-Dec-2011, 12:37

one of the best little cameras for the PRICE is a Calumet CC402 !
its for wide lenses like 65mm to 150mm great for landscape
I always say the best Camera // or lens for you to start with
is the best you can aford then as you grow with it you can
then buy more biger & better
now the camera is only a light tight box holding the lens & film apart
so go for a good lens First

strohscw

31-Dec-2011, 02:02

rdenney

31-Dec-2011, 14:37

Frank Petronio

31-Dec-2011, 14:52

Cambo-Wides are kind of a one-trick pony at a premium price. The lens mounts cost 2-4x what a naked lens costs and they are fabricated just at the edge of being too complex to cobble yourself ;-)

Thebes

31-Dec-2011, 15:47

Get yourself a cheap system monorail like the Cambo SC and put your money into glass, most 4x5 lenses can be fit to most 4x5 cameras.

You really should try to use swings and tilts, not just shifts- a full range of movements opens a lot of compositional possibilities, and allow you to place the plane of critical focus where you want it. I've seen system monorails with bag bellows and normal bellows for a couple hundred here and at that darned auction site- its money well spent even if you move on to a P&S or field camera later.

More than half the reason I shoot large format is for the movements. I often use movements even when handheld with my Super Graphic. In college at Indiana U everyone in the LF class was taught on a monorail so they could learn movements, the idea being that even a capable field camera got in the way of learning them. If I'd have learned 4x5 on a P&S I'm pretty sure I'd be shooting a Mamiya 7 instead of LF.

banjo

31-Dec-2011, 16:44

Kirk Fry

31-Dec-2011, 17:03

When I measure the image on my 4x5 negative diagonally it is 153 mm.

banjo

31-Dec-2011, 17:43

yes it maybe 153mm not all filn holder are the same but close
BUT that NO movements I thank that Kodak say you need a lens with 172mm
Image Circle but thats still not much for movements
AND my 165 is the hole 4x5 diagonally not just the image

rdenney

31-Dec-2011, 17:50

a Super-Angulon 5.6/65mm has a Image Circle Diameter at f/22 170mm
AND you need a Image Circle Diameter of 165mm for 4x5
Super-Angulon 4/53mm Image Circle Diameter at f/16 115mm
and that wont work!!!!

The actual image area of my 4x5 Lisco film holders has a diagonal of 154mm. The opening is 3.825 x 4.730 inches.

The 65 f/8 Super Angulon has an image circle at f/16 of 155mm, and will just cover 4x5 with no room for movements. But the 65/5.6 will provide just a bit of room for movements. The 65mm Super Angulons are the shortest of the pre-XL Super Angulons that will cover 4x5 in standard film holders.

Both the 47XL and 58XL Super Angulons provide image circles at f/22 of 166mm and will cover 4x5.

It is commonly believed that Schneider specs are conservative. But my 47/5.6, which has an image circle of 123mm at f/22, shows significant darkening in the corners on 6x12, and my 6x12 holder has a diagonal measurement of 123mm.

But the image circle only has to cover the image, not the nominal format size, which in the case of 4x5 is actually bigger than the film itself.

Rick "noting that when working at the margins, nominal format sizes are not accurate enough" Denney

Frank Bunnik

1-Jan-2012, 02:53

I shoot 4x5 using my 5,6 65mm Super-Angulon, usually at f/22 or f/32. It covers 4x5 with ease and with some room to spare for shift movements. I use it with the correct center-filter. For slides, the center filter is essential.

All the best for 2012, Frank
www.frankbunnik.zenfolio.com

Brian Ellis

1-Jan-2012, 11:09

Thanks for all the feedback,
my problem is that I am spoiled with the shift fuctionality from my Canon TSE lenses (17 and 24) and I found out that this is very valuable not only for architecture but also for landscape photography.
Thats why I am looking for a lightweight LF camera with shift functionality like the cambo wide, but still 28 days away from beeing allowed to see the buy/sell forum.

I haven't read this entire thread but in skimming I've noticed that you've mentioned "light" or "portable" 3 or 4 different times as being one of the two features that are most important to you in a LF camera (the other being shift).

I'd suggest that you consider a field camera that has front or back shift or both rather than a metal monorail if you want light and portable. Just off the top of my head that would include Shen Hao, Chamonix, Ebony, Linhof Technika, Wisner, and Wista (some models). Maybe Zone VI, I can't remember whether they have shift or not. Some are available new and used, some only used. You won't be able to pick up any of these for the $200-$300 or so that many monorails sell for (think about why they sell for so little) but you can easily stay under $1,000 except for Ebony and Linhof.

With respect to your TS-E lenses (I have the 24mm TS-E, great lens) remember that vertical shift with it is duplicated in LF cameras with front rise or back tilt or both (if the camera doesn't have front rise or you run out of room aim the camera up, tilt the back forward to make vertical lines parallel). Almost all LF field cameras, even those that don't include a shift movement, have front rise and/or back tilt, most have both.

So it's actually only to duplicate horizontal shift on your TS-E lens for which your LF camera will need a separate shift movement (and you actually don't even need it for that if the camera has swing but that's too much detail to get into here). If you mostly use vertical shift with the TS-E (e.g. mostly for architecture) maybe having a shift movement on a LF camera isn't that big a deal after all.

rdenney

1-Jan-2012, 12:13

...You won't be able to pick up any of these for the $200-$300 or so that many monorails sell for (think about why they sell for so little) but you can easily stay under $1,000 except for Ebony and Linhof....

Dangerous to assume causes based on correlation alone. There are many reasons why monorails might be cheap, not least that they were used by professionals in the 4x5 format far more than wooden field cameras, and thus there are lots more of them available in the market, which drives down the price. It could also be that they last. I looked at a Zone VI (I think) at a camera store in Houston in November, and it had rickety joints that would have had to be completely rebuilt before that camera could have ever been stable for use. The rickety pivots were simple holes in brass plates with rivets or pins running through them--not a durable hinge at all. That camera had a $600 price tag as I recall. The professional metal technical cameras like the Linhof are an expensive exception, of course. But even a $1500 Linhof Technika might be 50 years old and still require a trip to Marflex to be tuned up.

A field camera in good condition is a perfectly fine camera. But it is wrong to assume that monorail cameras are unmanageably heavy and bulky as you hint, or that their inconvenience in the field is the reason they are cheap, as you more than hint. Many folks use monorails in the field. It takes me no more time to set up my Sinar as it takes to set up a field camera, but then I have found ways to transport it that don't require that I field strip the camera.

But there is another reason for suggesting a monorail as a first large-format camera. It makes it easy to visualize camera movements needed to solve specific problems. Yes, one can duplicate those movements on better field cameras, and for that matter on better tilt-shift lenses for small format. But the reason one can duplicate them is because one understands them, and that understanding and experience is a lot easier when you don't have to do a tilt to achieve a rise, etc.

I really think people are tempted to make two mistakes when considering their first large-format camera. Musicians make the same mistakes when choosing an instrument. They are:

1. They believe this is the only camera they will ever buy. Buying a camera is not like getting married. You don't have to pay alimony if you stray at a later date. Polygamy is not against the law. Most large-format photographers end up with several partners, if not a veritable harem.

2. They build their requirements around activities they may not ever actually undertake, and underestimate the importance of convenience features that make their most common activities easier and more pleasurable. A person might put their camera in a backpack and hike around once in a great while, but they may do the bulk of their work from the trunk of their car or even in their own yard. Or they might make pictures of that remote spot once in ten years, but photograph the old buildings in their town every weekend.

Avoiding these mistakes would suggest getting a camera that makes common photography easy and fun, and that makes learning to use large format most productive. Avoiding the first mistake suggests not overspending for a first camera--we never really understand our requirements until we get some experience.

Besides, at 7 or 8 pounds, a Sinar F is not significantly heavier than most field cameras. Those cameras that are significantly lighter are much more fiddly, and much less stiff. And the difference is at most several pounds--a sliver of the total weight of a complete kit.

Rick "on his fifth rail camera and after 35 years still hasn't matured enough to need a field camera, despite occasional temptations" Denney

BrianShaw

1-Jan-2012, 12:22

2. They build their requirements around activities they may not ever actually undertake, ...

... or they never really figure out what their requirements are. Too often there are post that bacially indicate "I would like to do everything" or "I'm not sure what I want to do, you tell me waht I want to do". Both are natural inclinations but can be self-destructive.

strohscw

1-Jan-2012, 13:14

A lot of interesting suggestions, thanks for that.

After several days of reading and investigation I am getting closer to a Ebony RSW45.
I would like to use it with a 65 or 75 lens with a 6x12 horseman film back or with normal 4x5" B/W film.

What you think about it?
What lenses (types) would you suggest (wide angle and short tele)?
Are there any used RSW45 out there (none at Ebay)?

Thank you very much and Happy New Year!

Brian Ellis

1-Jan-2012, 13:42

Dangerous to assume causes based on correlation alone. There are many reasons why monorails might be cheap, not least that they were used by professionals in the 4x5 format far more than wooden field cameras, and thus there are lots more of them available in the market, which drives down the price. It could also be that they last. I looked at a Zone VI (I think) at a camera store in Houston in November, and it had rickety joints that would have had to be completely rebuilt before that camera could have ever been stable for use. The rickety pivots were simple holes in brass plates with rivets or pins running through them--not a durable hinge at all. That camera had a $600 price tag as I recall. The professional metal technical cameras like the Linhof are an expensive exception, of course. But even a $1500 Linhof Technika might be 50 years old and still require a trip to Marflex to be tuned up.

A field camera in good condition is a perfectly fine camera. But it is wrong to assume that monorail cameras are unmanageably heavy and bulky as you hint, or that their inconvenience in the field is the reason they are cheap, as you more than hint. Many folks use monorails in the field. It takes me no more time to set up my Sinar as it takes to set up a field camera, but then I have found ways to transport it that don't require that I field strip the camera.

But there is another reason for suggesting a monorail as a first large-format camera. It makes it easy to visualize camera movements needed to solve specific problems. Yes, one can duplicate those movements on better field cameras, and for that matter on better tilt-shift lenses for small format. But the reason one can duplicate them is because one understands them, and that understanding and experience is a lot easier when you don't have to do a tilt to achieve a rise, etc.

I really think people are tempted to make two mistakes when considering their first large-format camera. Musicians make the same mistakes when choosing an instrument. They are:

1. They believe this is the only camera they will ever buy. Buying a camera is not like getting married. You don't have to pay alimony if you stray at a later date. Polygamy is not against the law. Most large-format photographers end up with several partners, if not a veritable harem.

2. They build their requirements around activities they may not ever actually undertake, and underestimate the importance of convenience features that make their most common activities easier and more pleasurable. A person might put their camera in a backpack and hike around once in a great while, but they may do the bulk of their work from the trunk of their car or even in their own yard. Or they might make pictures of that remote spot once in ten years, but photograph the old buildings in their town every weekend.

Avoiding these mistakes would suggest getting a camera that makes common photography easy and fun, and that makes learning to use large format most productive. Avoiding the first mistake suggests not overspending for a first camera--we never really understand our requirements until we get some experience.

Besides, at 7 or 8 pounds, a Sinar F is not significantly heavier than most field cameras. Those cameras that are significantly lighter are much more fiddly, and much less stiff. And the difference is at most several pounds--a sliver of the total weight of a complete kit.

Rick "on his fifth rail camera and after 35 years still hasn't matured enough to need a field camera, despite occasional temptations" Denney

Rick, I made a suggestion that someone who says that he's looking for a camera that's light and portable consider a type of camera designed with those attributes in mind, as opposed to a type of camera not generally so designed. That's all. I'm glad you like all your monorail cameras.

Frank Petronio

1-Jan-2012, 16:46

Brian Ellis

1-Jan-2012, 17:20

I read his original post and he wanted:

1. Inexpensive

2. Lightweight

3. Able to do architecture, as in having lots of movements

Since no camera masters all three of these factors decisively... a reasonably compact monorail would make a good compromise.

Of course an Ebony that costs 5x as much would sort of work too, although it wouldn't have as many movements or be as easy to use. But it would be lightweight.

And pretty! Don't forget pretty! And they burn well if you get cold!

And don't forget with those monorails, you can't sell them for anything since so many people are dumping them on the market just to get rid of them but you can use them as weapons, doorstops and paperweights (emphasis on the "weight" part) after you replace them with a field camera. : - )

Frank Petronio

1-Jan-2012, 18:10

rdenney

1-Jan-2012, 18:17

Haha yeah you buy them for a couple hundred and resell them for a couple hundred.

Which is less than the depreciation of buying a new camera and selling it a couple of months later when you can't figure out how to open it up!

Preach it, Brother Frank!

Rick "noting a $300 expenditure can never cost you more than $300, while a 20% depreciation of $1600 costs more" Denney

Brian Ellis

1-Jan-2012, 22:58

Haha yeah you buy them for a couple hundred and resell them for a couple hundred.

Which is less than the depreciation of buying a new camera and selling it a couple of months later when you can't figure out how to open it up!

Buy for $300, sell for $300? Yeah, that pretty much sums up the typical experience of someone who buys a monorail for field work as their first camera - buy it, regret it, sell it.

Frank Petronio

1-Jan-2012, 23:43

So is the horse deader if you beat it until it stops breathing or if you keep flogging it until it's mush?

strohscw

2-Jan-2012, 00:25

rdenney

2-Jan-2012, 07:05

hi together,

I think there was a misunderstanding:
I am not looking for a cheap camera, I am looking for a very good, light weight camera with shifting capabilities, 4x5"inch with the possibility to use a horseman 6x12 rollfilm back.
The only thing is that I would prefer a used one because if I took the wrong one as first camera I wouldn´t loose that much money.
I want to buy very good lenses in the range from about 65 to 200mm.
This taken together I thought of the Ebony RSW45 as starting point. I am not so shure about the lenses. I prefer in my work (Landscapes and architecture) mainly the wide angle lenses, in this case I have to cover both formats, 4x5" and the 6x12cm.
br
Wolfram

If you don't mind spending money, then the Schneider Super Angulon XL in 72 and 90 mm will give you a strong wide-angle capability supporting a lot of movements. The older Super Angulon 90/5.6 will do just as well, as will the Rodenstock Grandagon or Nikkor SW. All are excellent--all were made for professional use. What I'm not sure about is which of these will fit through the front opening on an Ebony, but someone will be able to answer that.

Any of the 120mm wides (Super Angulon, Grandagon, etc.) will have abundant coverage and will also be outstanding performers.

The faster versions are easier to focus and usually have a bit more coverage, while the slower versions are more compact, when two versions are available from a manufacturer at a particular focal length.

For 6x12, the 72 is pretty wide, but the 58XL is even wider and will cover 6x12 handily. The 65mm f/5.6 Super Angulon will cover 4x5 with some movement (not as much as the XL lenses), but it will cover 6x12 with more abundant movement, particularly in the landscape mode.

All cameras with an "international" or "graflok" back, as opposed to a "spring" back, will allow the installation of any of the 6x12 holders. The Horseman is designed to clamp onto the back after unclipping the ground glass on a graflok/international back. Linhof makes the most highly regarded of this style of roll film holder. Sinar made the unique Vario (older) and Vario Zoom (newer) model, which slides in and will fit under most spring backs. It can also be set to any roll-film format.

I have a Shen-Hao (sub-$300 new) 6x12 holder with a simple film advance that of thered-window type, which works perfectly. I also use a Sinar Vario, which works perfectly, but it is a bit more fiddly because of its additional features.

(Calumet also markets a 6x12 holder that slides in, but there are conflicting reports on how flatly in holds in the film).

Some of these are heavy and all are heavier than a standard sheet film holder, so the strength and rigidity of the camera comes into play.

Based on the prices I've seen on ebay lately for used cameras, you'll be well reward for waiting until you can access the For Sale forum and then spend a little time waiting for the right camera to be offered. Used Ebonys have never seemed to me to be thick on the ground, but they do come up.

Rick "who, with a large budget and intending to do architecture work, would still own a Sinar F2 monorail, and spend the bulk of the money on Super Angulon XL wides" Denney

Frank Petronio

2-Jan-2012, 08:22

In spite of my prejudice against too-pretty overpriced wooden cameras, the Ebony RW is still a very nice camera to learn on. However it may not be the idea choice to do architecture with, especially with wider lenses, and you may want to investigate the product line-up further:

http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?t=1865

Tobias Key

2-Jan-2012, 08:46

I bought my first large format just over a year ago. I bought a monorail and I'm glad I did because it gave me the opportunity to use a camera lots of movements and lots of bellows extension, mine also came with extras like a bag bellows and recessed lens board. Now if I look at a field camera I have a much better idea whether or not it fulfills my needs because I've had the opportunity to try a camera that can do everything. Field camera specs can be bewilderingly different and buying a monorail is a pretty cheap way of finding out what you need your camera to do. I think you could argue that buying a monorail for a few months to learn on might save you money in the long run, and the learning process might be far quicker.

(I should add as a caveat I'm primarily a portrait photographer so light weight and portability are not as important to me as things like long bellows extension.)

tgtaylor

2-Jan-2012, 09:28

Why not buy a lightweight field camera for landscape and a monorail for architecture? A technical field camera like the Toyo AX or AII will work for all landscape and some, but not all, architecture. The Toyo/Omega 45C will work for all architecture and you can pack it in a backpack but I wouldn't want to backpack with it other than transporting it to a location not too far off a paved path.

Quality film cameras are inexpensive these days so there's no reason not to own more than one if your shooting interest exceeds the capabilities of the field camera. As for myself, I own a Toyo 45CF and Gitzo GT 0540 for lightweight multiday backpacking or bicycle touring, a Toyo 45AX for for demanding shots; a Toyo 45C and Robos for architecture; and finally the Toyo 810G for the ultimate shot - near the road, of course.

Thomas

Alan Gales

2-Jan-2012, 11:37

I agree with Thomas. Why not own both? I own a Tachihara for the field but with 13" of bellows draw it can't close focus long lenses so I bought a Sinar P for portraiture.

I have seen nice Cambo/Calumet monorails go for as cheap as $150.00 without a lens. In fact I know of someone that purchased one locally for $75.00. All he did was advertise on Craigslist that he was looking for a cheap 4x5 camera.

banjo

2-Jan-2012, 12:11

SO strohscw
if you have the money to buy an Ebony RSW45 justdoit
I would not!! I would get a Horseman !!
they look like a better camera to me I have a Linhof !!
BUT I like my horseman MUCH BETTER!

strohscw

2-Jan-2012, 13:20

The decission has been made.
Today I ordered an Ebony RSW45. In addition to that via Ebay a 65 and 90mm lens and a 6x12 Rolfilmback.

Thanks for all your input. Now is time to start working with it and make my own experiences.

Greetings
Wolfram

John Kasaian

2-Jan-2012, 15:40

The architectural version of the Calumet 400 is a great starter. I think I paid $80 for mine. That leavesa generous budget for a good 90mm, tripod & plenty of film & film holders.

ashlee52

3-Jan-2012, 10:37

Wolfram

Good luck with your Ebony. Certainly it is a wonderful camera... and one which lies right between most monorails and field cameras in design.

I do think you may find yourself frustrated trying to work with a 65mm lens. That is to my mind a very special purpose lens, even for 6x12. But 150's and 210's are cheap so you can try those out too.

I really encourage you to learn to use sheet film, even though at first it seems so much more complex. Slipping in a 4x5 holder is just so much easier than replacing a groundglass. I have a few roll film holders, and actually used one once. Once.